Tafsir of Al-Isra 17:94

"And nothing has prevented the people..."

{أَن} (An): The first instance is in the accusative case as a second object for mana‘a (prevented). The second instance is in the nominative case as the subject of the same verb.

{الهدى} (The Guidance): This refers to the Revelation.

Meaning: Nothing prevented them from believing in the Qur’an and the prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) except for a doubt that lingered in their chests: their denial that God would send a human being as a messenger.

The interrogative hamza in {أَبَعَثَ اللَّهُ} (Has God sent...) is for the purpose of denial. What they denied is, in the sight of God, the very thing that is rejected, because the principle of His wisdom dictates that He does not send a messenger of revelation except to his own kind, or to the prophets.

He then established this by saying: {لَوْ كَانَ فِي الْأَرْضِ مَلَائِكَةٌ يَمْشُونَ} (If there were upon the earth angels walking...) upon their feet just as humans walk, not flying with wings to the heavens to hear from its inhabitants and learn what must be known, {مُطْمَئِنِّينَ} (tranquil), dwelling and residing upon the earth, {لَنَزَّلْنَا عَلَيْهِم مِّنَ السَّمَاءِ مَلَكًا رَّسُولًا} (We would have sent down to them from the heaven an angel as a messenger) to teach them goodness and guide them to the right paths.

As for humans, they are not of this status. Rather, the angel is sent to one chosen from among them for prophethood, and that chosen one then undertakes their invitation and guidance.

If you ask: Is it permissible for basharan (a human) and malakan (an angel) to be in the accusative case as a state (hal) of the word rasulan (messenger)?

I say: It is a sound interpretation, and the meaning is clear.

{قُلْ كَفَىٰ بِاللَّهِ شَهِيدًا بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَكُمْ ۚ إِنَّهُ كَانَ بِعِبَادِهِ خَبِيرًا بَصِيرًا} "Say, 'Sufficient is Allah as Witness between me and you. Indeed, He is ever, concerning His servants, Acquainted and Seeing.'"